Professional Standards and Principled Policing Bureau

Deputy Chief Michael Connolly

The Professional Standards and Principled Policing Bureau was established in February 2016, to oversee the proposed use of force reforms, as well as to coordinate efforts of the Police Department with the United States Department of Justice Collaborative Reform Initiative.

The Collaborative Reform Initiative for Technical Assistance is a proactive, non-adversarial, and cost effective form of technical assistance for agencies with significant law enforcement related issues. “The CRI-TA’s purpose is to improve trust between police agencies and the communities they serve by providing long-term, holistic strategy that identifies issues within an agency that may affect public trust. The CRI-TA offers recommendations based on a comprehensive agency assessment for how to resolve those issues and enhance the relationship between the police and the community.”

In addition to supporting the Department’s effort to increase transparency and accountability, the Bureau contains the units listed below:

Professional Standards

The mission of the Professional Standards Unit is to contribute to excellence in law enforcement by increasing professionalism and maintaining high levels of accountability within the San Francisco Police Department through the use of early intervention tracking and related auditing systems.

Written Directives

The Written Directives Unit is responsible for facilitating the review, development and publication of Department policies, bulletins, manuals and forms related to the operation of the San Francisco Police Department.

(So IDK. I thought that this exact kind of “corrective education” was “offered” to alleged shoplifters at the Whole Foodses of San Francisco, but I don’t know that this Corrective Education Company was the one involved.)

Anyway, I saw this scene at one of my rare visits to the Haight Street WF…

SAN FRANCISCO (Aug. 15, 2017) — City Attorney Dennis Herrera today hailed a key victory against Corrective Education Company after a court ruled that the private, profit-driven business was engaging in extortion and false imprisonment in its “diversion program” scheme.

“We should all be concerned about privatizing our justice system, especially when a business like Corrective Education Company uses the threat of criminal prosecution to intimidate and extort people,” Herrera said. “This ruling goes to the heart of their predatory business model, which is predicated on threats, deception and falsehoods. CEC is enriching itself on the backs of others, and many of the people they prey upon have limited means and are just barely getting by.”

Herrera sued the company in November 2015 over its “corrective education” scheme, asserting that the company’s practices amount to extortion and false imprisonment. The lawsuit was filed in San Francisco Superior Court on behalf of the People of the State of California.

Corrective Education Company contracts with major retailers, and when someone is suspected of shoplifting, they are taken to an isolated room and threatened with arrest and criminal prosecution unless they agree to watch a video created by CEC. In that video, CEC threatens to have suspects criminally prosecuted unless they sign a confession, agree to pay CEC up to $500, and undergo a six-hour “cognitive restructuring” and “behavioral modification” program. Faced with this Hobson’s “choice” between criminal prosecution and participating in CEC’s program, 90 percent of CEC’s victims — upwards of 13,000 Californians — “consent” to enroll in CEC’s program. After obtaining the forced confessions, CEC follows up with phone calls to the victims, again threatening them with criminal prosecution unless they pay CEC hundreds of dollars. CEC has also sent over 2,000 debt-collection letters in which it cloaks itself with prosecutorial authority in further efforts to enrich itself.

CEC operates in more than 25 states across the country.

In a ruling issued Monday afternoon, San Francisco Superior Court Judge Harold Kahn found Corrective Education Company engaged in extortion and false imprisonment.

“The undisputed facts … establish that CEC’s diversion program runs afoul of California’s extortion laws,” Judge Kahn wrote in his ruling granting summary adjudication on the two central issues in the case. “This is textbook extortion under California law, and has been so declared for at least 125 years.”

Numerous jurisdictions in California, including San Francisco and Los Angeles, offer legitimate, pretrial diversion programs that are overseen by district attorney’s offices. CEC operates entirely outside of the criminal justice system and without the approval of local prosecutors.

In his ruling, Kahn ruled that each iteration of CEC’s diversion program in California constitutes extortion and false imprisonment and that Herrera was entitled to an injunction halting the unlawful practices. CEC’s clients have included Walmart, Bloomingdale’s, Ralph’s, Abercrombie and Fitch, Burlington Coat Factory, and Kroger’s.

In the ruling, Kahn wrote: “By the quid pro quo of asking for money in exchange for forbearance in calling police, the retailer and CEC are acting in concert and are jointly liable for the extortionate conduct.”

The specifics of the injunction are still to be fleshed out, as is restitution and monetary civil penalties of up to $2,500 per violation.

So here’s the theory. Say your marketing people go hog-wild with the chalk ads on the Streets of San Francisco, like this:

So then somebody calls 311 or somebody else posts a photo on the Twitter and then an investigator at the City Attorney’s Office takes a look at things and then the people at Parlophone / Warner Bros. get a jingle and then somehow things get smoothed over by the Brothers Warner or somebody else making at buy at the SFMTA MUNI for some hastily-created and more or less useless ads such as:

Our BofA Building, the largest in Frisco, is known by one and all as “Triple Five Cal” AFAIK, but there was an effort to start calling it the Triple Nickel not too long ago. Oh, and Donald Trump owns a piece of it, so that explains the “sort of.”

Anyway, the whole sawtoothed design on the exterior was so that every windowed office was a corner office. See?

(Afore the Carnelian Room went out of biz I sat for dinner in one of these corners on the second highest floor – San Francisco Magazine (the actual physical magazine) had a coupon (made of cardboard, an insert) inside what said “Complete Dinner For Two” for just $49.95. “Score,” I said. 180 degrees of window, man. Ah memories. I suppose I had the same view as all the office workers. Impressive, sure. The view, that is.)

But how do you clean the windows – like this, with a giant telescoping arm what needs to jut out more and more as the workers descend?

I think I see the problem here, I think the CivitasNow people are thinking they might get a ticket for two or three or four or five figures, but, IRL, what they might end up with is a settlement for six or seven figures if they continue to embarrass / piss off / mock area residents, such as a Mayor, or a City Attorney, or even a Benioff or two.

Hey CivitasNow, hey Bluewolf, do you think there might be a reason why some DreamForcers covered up some of your numerous chalk ads?

Perhaps you all have reached Pariah status, but you don’t even know it?

“Citizens can obtain permits for sidewalk stencils, but there is no legal means for a company to advertise using sidewalk stencils, Gordon said. Still, many companies throughout the years have created guerrilla marketing campaigns on city sidewalks, including Zynga and IBM.”

What you bluewolfers ought to do, you know, wikiwiki, is come on downstairs, buy some brushes at a CVS, and then start scrubbing…